public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug libstdc++/102994] std::atomic<ptr>::wait is not marked const Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2022 00:44:30 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-102994-4-8Tv92O0NeU@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-102994-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102994 --- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> --- N.B. [member.functions] in the standard says "For a non-virtual member function described in the C++ standard library, an implementation may declare a different set of member function signatures, provided that any call to the member function that would select an overload from the set of declarations described in this document behaves as if that overload were selected." In general, being declared with a different signature is permitted. Do you have an example where a call to std::atomic<T>::notify_one() that should be valid according to the standard either fails to compile or misbehaves, as a result of being const qualified?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-04 0:44 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-10-29 2:37 [Bug libstdc++/102994] New: " gcc_bugzilla at axeitado dot com 2021-10-30 10:42 ` [Bug libstdc++/102994] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-12-10 1:57 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-12-10 2:14 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-12-10 10:52 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-03 20:31 ` gcc_bugzilla at axeitado dot com 2022-02-03 21:01 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-03 21:34 ` gcc_bugzilla at axeitado dot com 2022-02-04 0:03 ` rodgertq at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-04 0:33 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-04 0:39 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-04 0:44 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2022-02-04 0:55 ` rodgertq at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-04 1:37 ` gcc_bugzilla at axeitado dot com 2022-02-04 10:55 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-02-11 17:41 ` rodgertq at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-04-07 15:42 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-04-21 7:50 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-04-22 22:53 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-04-22 22:54 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-05-10 14:57 ` rodgertq at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-102994-4-8Tv92O0NeU@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).